Video: Cop Murders 17-Year-Old Kid For Not Complying With Traffic Stop Boy had flashed lights at cop for having overly bright headlights

Since when are cops granted executioner rights, MW?

The little scumbag was treated properly by the arresting officer and I respect that. Punishment is the duty of the court system... or has our system changed and I was absent the day they told everybody else?

Eric wrote:

Since when are cops granted executioner rights, MW?

The little scumbag was treated properly by the arresting officer and I respect that.  Punishment is the duty of the court system... or has our system changed and I was absent the day they told everybody else?

  LOL!...An illustration of some [actually many] absurd posts/opinions was met with exactly as I thought it would be....If it was posted today is Friday....there would have been disagreement....very predictable...

No actual response to the post, I see.

Eric wrote:

No actual response to the post, I see.

There was no 'actual response' necessary....

Law enforcement did a good job in apprehending....they didn't take him out as it is posted here time after time....'like they always do'...Before assuming that's directed at you [eric]...it isn't....Further the officers reacted as the situation presented itself and not by the emotion of the case so again....they did their jobs professionally which seems they don't get enough credit for in dealing with what they have to deal with...That's why blanket statements that all are corrupt and/or abusers of their power are false...Yes, some have, some are, and some will but the % that do is never acceptable but thankfully very low and should cloud the integrity...professionalism...and courage of those that serve the public in diffucult situations on a regular basis....Just nice on occassion to have the opportunity to attempt to show them in a different light....

Who cops should strive to be...




Who cops think they are.....

There should be no stop and frisk or other pretense to detain a us citizen that has presented no probable cause... period. Any defense otherwise is a blatant abuse of authority under our current constitution... period. I'm not sure why a citizen would want another system in place... except that they defer to the govt as some omnipotent power that is greater than an individual's rights

Great post!

PkrBum wrote:

There should be no stop and frisk or other pretense to detain a us citizen that has presented no probable cause... period. Any defense otherwise is a blatant abuse of authority under our current constitution... period. I'm not sure why a citizen would want another system in place... except that they defer to the govt as some omnipotent power that is greater than an individual's rights

You've just made the point for stop and frisk...and described under the circumstances that it would be legal to do so...Officers should have to have reasonable suspicion [suspicion that a normal everyday citizen would have and or be able to articulate] that would lead such a reasonable citizen to believe that person(s) are in a certain time, place, location and are acting in a suspicious manner where there is a high crime rate where crimes have been committed....are being committed...or may be committed based on the prior crimes in the area...Furthermore there are many times when law enforcement receives calls from citizens about suspicious activities in the area ie...loitering, around area of a closed business...vehicle/pedestrian traffic stopping and appearing that some illegal contraband is being exchanged...

Agree with you up to a point...there are also 'citizen contacts' under these and other types of situations where a non-custodial contact is made...Inquiries are made and should the individuals refuse to cooperate then they are free to exit the area which in and of itself solves a portion of the problem...During that conversation it can escalate into something more based on observations, mannerisms, or the actions of the individual or be nothing more than a contact/conversation...It's proactive policing and preventing crimes..

Example: There have been a rash of vehicle break-ins in a certain neighborhood...You (citizen) see a group of what appears to be teenagers walking through the neighborhood appearing to be looking in the direction of parked vehicles.
Upon arrival...officers make contact with the individuals: What do you expect them to do?...Not make contact or appear to detain them because it may violate their rights?...Or, make contact and make inquiries as to whether they have a reason to be in this particular area and ascertain what they are doing?....Lastly, because the officer(s) have knowledge about the rash of break-ins and they observe the group wouldn't you expect them to do their jobs?...Could it all go to crap in a second...of course but if anyone doesn't want law enforcement doing this then you'll end up with a reactive [going from call to call] officers that will be nothing more than report taking after the fact and crime will go up....In any aspect of not just law enforcement but other occupations there is always a chance that some will do something either against policies...directives...or the laws....but that is not a reason to stop having laws and or in this case taking a tool away from law enforcement...

Presumption of innocence

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

mediawatcher wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

There should be no stop and frisk or other pretense to detain a us citizen that has presented no probable cause... period. Any defense otherwise is a blatant abuse of authority under our current constitution... period. I'm not sure why a citizen would want another system in place... except that they defer to the govt as some omnipotent power that is greater than an individual's rights

   You've just made the point for stop and frisk...and described under the circumstances that it would be legal to do so...Officers should have to have reasonable suspicion [suspicion that a normal everyday citizen would have and or be able to articulate] that would lead such a reasonable citizen to believe that person(s) are in a certain time, place, location and are acting in a suspicious manner where there is a high crime rate where crimes have been committed....are being committed...or may be committed based on the prior crimes in the area...Furthermore there are many times when law enforcement receives calls from citizens about suspicious activities in the area ie...loitering, around area of a closed business...vehicle/pedestrian traffic stopping and appearing that some illegal contraband is being exchanged...
   
    Agree with you up to a point...there are also 'citizen contacts' under these and other types of situations where a non-custodial contact is made...Inquiries are made and should the individuals refuse to cooperate then they are free to exit the area which in and of itself solves a portion of the problem...During that conversation it can escalate into something more based on observations, mannerisms, or the actions of the individual or be nothing more than a contact/conversation...It's proactive policing and preventing crimes..

    Example: There have been a rash of vehicle break-ins in a certain neighborhood...You (citizen) see a group of what appears to be teenagers walking through the neighborhood appearing to be looking in the direction of parked vehicles.
     Upon arrival...officers make contact with the individuals:  What do you expect them to do?...Not make contact or appear to detain them because it may violate their rights?...Or, make contact and make inquiries as to whether they have a reason to be in this particular area and ascertain what they are doing?....Lastly, because the officer(s) have knowledge about the rash of break-ins and they observe the group wouldn't you expect them to do their jobs?...Could it all go to crap in a second...of course but if anyone doesn't want law enforcement doing this then you'll end up with a reactive [going from call to call] officers that will be nothing more than report taking after the fact and crime will go up....In any aspect of not just law enforcement but other occupations there is always a chance that some will do something either against policies...directives...or the laws....but that is not a reason to stop having laws and or in this case taking a tool away from law enforcement...

Such "assumptions" are used to rough up innocent citizens and must be stopped. In the absence of physical evidence or witnesses, I believe stopping and questioning is reasonable upon being dispatched, however, justifying bodily searches on "suspicious behavior" is way too broad and is abused grossly by the LEO community. A citizen that has been arrested, based upon probable cause, may be searched, handcuffed, etc... however, a citizen on the street in an area where crimes are committed, is presumed innocent in the absence of evidence and may not be detained or harassed.

Eric wrote:

mediawatcher wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

There should be no stop and frisk or other pretense to detain a us citizen that has presented no probable cause... period. Any defense otherwise is a blatant abuse of authority under our current constitution... period. I'm not sure why a citizen would want another system in place... except that they defer to the govt as some omnipotent power that is greater than an individual's rights

   You've just made the point for stop and frisk...and described under the circumstances that it would be legal to do so...Officers should have to have reasonable suspicion [suspicion that a normal everyday citizen would have and or be able to articulate] that would lead such a reasonable citizen to believe that person(s) are in a certain time, place, location and are acting in a suspicious manner where there is a high crime rate where crimes have been committed....are being committed...or may be committed based on the prior crimes in the area...Furthermore there are many times when law enforcement receives calls from citizens about suspicious activities in the area ie...loitering, around area of a closed business...vehicle/pedestrian traffic stopping and appearing that some illegal contraband is being exchanged...
   
    Agree with you up to a point...there are also 'citizen contacts' under these and other types of situations where a non-custodial contact is made...Inquiries are made and should the individuals refuse to cooperate then they are free to exit the area which in and of itself solves a portion of the problem...During that conversation it can escalate into something more based on observations, mannerisms, or the actions of the individual or be nothing more than a contact/conversation...It's proactive policing and preventing crimes..

    Example: There have been a rash of vehicle break-ins in a certain neighborhood...You (citizen) see a group of what appears to be teenagers walking through the neighborhood appearing to be looking in the direction of parked vehicles.
     Upon arrival...officers make contact with the individuals:  What do you expect them to do?...Not make contact or appear to detain them because it may violate their rights?...Or, make contact and make inquiries as to whether they have a reason to be in this particular area and ascertain what they are doing?....Lastly, because the officer(s) have knowledge about the rash of break-ins and they observe the group wouldn't you expect them to do their jobs?...Could it all go to crap in a second...of course but if anyone doesn't want law enforcement doing this then you'll end up with a reactive [going from call to call] officers that will be nothing more than report taking after the fact and crime will go up....In any aspect of not just law enforcement but other occupations there is always a chance that some will do something either against policies...directives...or the laws....but that is not a reason to stop having laws and or in this case taking a tool away from law enforcement...

Such "assumptions" are used to rough up innocent citizens and must be stopped.  In the absence of physical evidence or witnesses, I believe stopping and questioning is reasonable upon being dispatched, however, justifying bodily searches on "suspicious behavior" is way too broad and is abused grossly by the LEO community.  A citizen that has been arrested, based upon probable cause, may be searched, handcuffed, etc... however, a citizen on the street in an area where crimes are committed, is presumed innocent in the absence of evidence and may not be detained or harassed.

     Would anyone be complaining had this pos in SC been stopped and frisked outside of the church because he were acting suspicious and appeared to be out of place?...In examples provided never mentioned that any of the contacts would have taken place in anyone's home...all were in public areas...Further, as posted yes there will be some that abuse and yes they should be held accountable/responsible but taking away an effective tool from law enforcement is not a correct move....

Florida State Statute 901.151...Florida Stop and Search Law...It's explained under what circumstances it's legal and it's on the books and effective....